Court won't block US lawsuit by apartheid victims
Lawyer Blogs
The Supreme Court said Monday that it can't intervene in an important dispute over the rights of apartheid victims to sue U.S. corporations in U.S. courts because four of the nine justices had to sit out the case over apparent conflicts.
The result is that a lawsuit accusing some prominent companies of violating international law by assisting South Africa's former apartheid government will go forward.
The court's hands were tied by federal laws that require at least six justices to hear any case before them.
Short of the required number by one, the court took the only path available to it and upheld an appeals court ruling allowing the suit to proceed.
The justices have ties to Bank of America, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Colgate-Palmolive, Credit Suisse, Exxon Mobil, Hewlett-Packard, IBM and Nestle, among nearly three dozen companies that asked the high court to step in.
Related listings
-
Invoking history, Bush wants court out of subpoena fight
Lawyer Blogs 05/10/2008If there's one thing Congress and the Bush administration can agree on, it's that they've got a fight of historic proportions on their hands.The House Judiciary Committee is demanding documents and testimony from President Bush's closest advisers abo...
-
High court says gay partners can't get health benefits
Lawyer Blogs 05/08/2008A same-sex marriage ban prevents governments and universities in Michigan from providing health insurance to the partners of gay workers, the state Supreme Court ruled Wednesday.The 5-2 decision affects up to 20 universities, community colleges, scho...
-
Court refuses to block execution in Ga.
Lawyer Blogs 05/07/2008The Supreme Court has refused to block the execution of a prisoner in Georgia, clearing the last obstacle to the resumption of capital punishment in the U.S. after a 7-month pause.William Earl Lynd was scheduled to die Tuesday evening. He would be th...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.